Typical PM targets are not typically better than atypical PM targets: Underlying mechanisms of Prospective Memory retrieval

In two experiments, predictions from the discrepancy-plus-search view: e.g., McDaniel & Einstein, 2000) were tested against predictions from the familiarity view: McDaniel, 1995) and the preparatory attentional and memory processes theory: PAM; Smith, 2003). Discrepancy was manipulated by mismatching the actual and the expected category typicality of PM targets while familiarity was manipulated by the category typicality of PM targets alone. Consistent with PAM’s prediction, higher PM performance with significant monitoring was found in the conditions where typical category exemplars served as nontargets. While the significant monitoring limited the opportunity for discrepancy to facilitate PM performance, further analyses hinted at a potential effect of discrepancy on PM performance. The implications of the findings are discussed under several theoretical frameworks.

Name thesis:degree_name

Master of Arts (MA)

Level thesis:degree_level

Thesis

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Psychology

Year dc:date.available

2010

Author dc:creator

• Lee, Ji hae

Contributors dc:contributor

• Mark McDaniel

• Prospective memory
• Discrepancy

Language dc:language

English (en)

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7936/K73X84R1

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:openscholarship.wustl.edu:etd-1785